SU-2: “Second-tier ACS” based on a tractor

In the early 1930s, the successes of industrialization in the Soviet Union allowed for the development of automotive and tank industry, which, in turn, allowed us to begin full and wide motorization and mechanization of units and divisions of the Red Army. The process of developing new tractors, automobiles, tanks and artillery tractors was at a rapid pace in the country. In accordance with the military-theoretical thought of that time, it was believed that the shock and fire power of mechanized formations should be provided not only by tanks, but also self-propelled guns — self-propelled artillery installations.

For this reason, the 2 of October 1930 of the year, the Revolutionary Military Council (RVS) of the Soviet Union adopts the “Resolution of the PBC on an experimental armored armament system in terms of self-propelled artillery installations”. According to the resolution adopted by the Soviet design bureaus and factories, it was necessary to design and manufacture 1 types of ACS for various purposes by October 1931 October. This scope of work in this area was not planned at that time in any country in the world, including Germany, which was considered a leader in this field.

Curious is the fact that, along with the ACS, direct support and maintenance of the mechanized units (most often these self-propelled guns were designed on the chassis of tanks), the RVS decision provided for the development of the “ACS of the second echelons” in the country. The tasks of the data of self-propelled artillery installations were defined as follows: “The purpose is to support and support the attack of the tanks of the second echelon of the escort of infantry”. Industrial tractors “Kommunar” and “Stalinets” should be used as chassis. The mass of self-propelled guns should not exceed 9-10 tons, maximum speed - 12-15 km / h. Arming these self-propelled second-tier planned 76,2-mm regimental gun or 76-mm anti-aircraft gun. The horizontal angle of the pickup should have been at least 300 degrees, the vertical angle should be 30 degrees.

Nowadays, it may seem strange to many, if not ridiculous, the enthusiasm of the leadership of the Red Army for self-propelled guns built on the chassis of conventional tractors. However, one should take into account the fact that at that time not a single army in the world had experience in creating such weapon systems. For this reason, the Soviet military and designers were forced to go by trial and error. In addition, the experience of using self-propelled guns on the chassis of tractors in 1920-s, including trophy white-guard self-propelled guns based on British and American tractors, was positive. These limitedly used combat vehicles showed a fairly high efficiency with relatively low labor costs for production.

In addition, the use of tractor chassis, which were several times cheaper than tank, promised for SAU great benefits. First, such a chassis made it possible to provide the Red Army quickly equipped with self-propelled artillery. Secondly, in the case of a big war, it was possible to dramatically increase the number of combat vehicles by simply reworking the existing tractors in the country's economy into self-propelled artillery installations. In those years, this idea seemed very attractive, especially if we take into account the poor equipment of the Red Army with armored vehicles and the existing difficulties with setting up the production of tanks in Soviet factories.

As the chassis for new self-propelled units, it was decided to choose the first Soviet tracked tractor "Kommunar", focusing on the model З-90. The Kommunar tractor, which was produced by the Kharkov Locomotive Plant (KhPZ), was developed on the basis of the popular German tractor Hanomag WD-50. This tractor was actively used not only in the Soviet national economy, but also in the Red Army as an artillery tractor. The tractors of the З-90 version were the most mass version of “Kommunar” and were produced with minor changes until the 1935 year. The main purpose of this series of tractors was “thrusting artillery loads with high speeds ahead up to the appearance of special tractors”. On the tractor Kommunar Z-90 there was a carburetor gasoline engine, which developed the power of the 90 hp. With a weight of 8,5 tons, he could carry up to 2 tons and pull in a trailer up to 6 tons of cargo. The tractor was equipped with a gearbox with three speeds forward and one back, it could reach speeds in the range from 3,9 km / h to 15,2 km / h. The power reserve of the Kommunar was 150 km.

In August, the Leningrad Bolshevik plant together with the military warehouse No. XXUMX located in Bryansk took up the development of an ACS of the second echelon on the basis of the tractor in August 1931. This warehouse was the main base for the construction and modernization of armored trains for the needs of the Red Army. It produced not only armored trains, but also armored tires, as well as individual armored cars. Joint development received the designation SU-60. The main armament of the self-propelled guns was the widespread 2-mm regimental gun model 76,2 of the year.

For installation on the chassis of the tractor "Kommunar" this tool it was strengthened. The driver's seat, the mounting brackets of the booth with the uprights and the gas tank in the rear of the tractor were removed. The gas tank was moved and secured over the right track, and the metal flooring of the frame at the cabin was expanded. On the site of the dismantled driver's seat in the middle part of the tractor, a regular gun stand of the Sormovsky plant design was installed, which was used on armored trains. Thanks to this decision, the gun received a shelling sector in 360 degrees. The project provided for the protection of the weapon with armor up to 10 mm in thickness, but on a prototype of the self-propelled gun, the armor was made of ordinary (not armored) steel. Ammunition 76,2-mm guns, which consisted of 200 shells, had to be transported on a special trailer cart.

The Su-2 self-propelled gun tests were conducted from 12 to 16 in October 1931 in the vicinity of military warehouse No. 60. In four days, the car passed the 35 km, while 39 shots were performed: 38 from the spot and one on the go. In order to maximize the conditions of the running tests to the military trials, the self-propelled unit towed a special tractor tractor P-18 with a weight of 2500 kg and gun crew (5 people). The maximum speed of the movement reached 12 km / h. In general, the SU-2 made a favorable impression on the representatives of the Red Army. Its positive qualities included: the presence of a circular sector of shelling from a gun and its compliance with the requirements of the army, relatively simple maintenance and speed characteristics that were not bad at that time. In addition, if the SU-2 self-propelled self-propelled gun was adopted by the Red Army, the problem with spare parts could be solved by using spare parts from conventional tractors.

Initially, the self-propelled guns even recommended the use of divisional artillery, and also suggested considering the possibility of developing on its base an 122-mm self-propelled howitzer, as well as a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. But the modified version of the SU-2 with the 122-mm gun, which was submitted some time later on the NIAP, turned out to be excessively heavy. SU-2 did not adopt the Red Army, and at the end of 1931 and the beginning of 1932, the country launched a new program for the construction of self-propelled artillery guns on the chassis of the T-26 light tank, which had better running characteristics and much more mobility . It was decided to concentrate all efforts on the development of self-propelled installations on tank and special chassis.

In parallel with the design of the SU-2 self-propelled gun at the Bolshevik plant in Leningrad, work was carried out to create a self-propelled unit with the SU-5 index (not to be confused with the SU-5 self-propelled gun, designed on the basis of the T-26 tank, which appeared a little later). This self-propelled gun was made using the SU-2 scheme on the same chassis of the Kommunar tractor. However, unlike the SU-2, the new self-propelled gun was supposed to be armed with an 76-mm anti-aircraft gun of the 1915 model of the year, while there was no reservation for an ACS. Due to this, the mass of self-propelled guns slightly decreased and did not exceed 9400 kg. To reduce rocking when shooting self-propelled gun Su-5 was equipped with 4-me folding stops. The prototype self-propelled gun, which was made in the spring 1932, successfully passed the test. The construction of 12-like artillery for military tests was even begun, but very soon it was stopped as the new 76,2-mm anti-aircraft gun of the 1931 model of the year became the main anti-aircraft gun of the Red Army. And the usual tractor chassis for the new artillery system was already rather weak.

SAU SU-2 and SU-5 were recommended for adoption, it was planned to even begin the construction of an experimental series of machines. But the appearance in the USSR of the T-26 tank, which was recognized as much more promising in terms of creating an ACS at its base, and also the order that was followed in 1932 to transfer all the old types of artillery systems to warehouses, put an end to these "combat tractors." The attempt to install a more perfect 5-mm anti-aircraft gun on the SU-76,2 was doomed to failure initially due to the lack of the necessary safety margin of the tractor chassis. As a result, both self-propelled guns were dismantled, and the idea of ​​building an ACS based on a tractor in the Soviet Union was not returned until the 1941 year.

It should be noted that in case of adopting the SU-2 and SU-5 self-propelled guns, they would inherit the problems of the Kommunar tractor itself. A significant drawback in the production of these machines at KhPZ was, in fact, individual production. Interchangeability of parts was absent even within the same series of machines. When ordering at the Kharkov factory of newly installed parts and assemblies, for example, an engine, it was necessary in addition to the catalog number to indicate the serial number of the tractor produced. Such a situation made it difficult to supply spare parts, complicated the operation of tractors and increased the cost of their production. Over time, the situation at KhPZ gradually changed for the better, however, this problem was not solved at the plant and with the release of other products until the beginning of World War II.

Performance characteristics of ACS SU-2:

Overall dimensions: length - 4350 mm, width - 2060 mm, height - 3300 mm.
Weight - 10 tons.
Maximum speed - 14 km / h.
Fuel capacity - 285 l.
Power reserve - 150 km.
Armament - 76,2-mm regimental gun model 1902 year.
Ammunition - 200 shells on the trailer.
Reservations - 6-10 mm.
Crew - 6 man.

Information sources:
http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/ussr/at_su2-5.htm
http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/WWII/tractor/bronetr2.php
http://coollib.net/b/248327/read (журнал «Техника и вооружение»)
Open source materials

Comments

[qwert]

It was with such tractors that the "great and brilliant" Tukhachevsky planned to equip the Red Army. He offered to build 9 armored tractors for each normal tank, moreover, to destroy normal tanks. He probably counted on the fact that in the event of a war the enemy would die of laughter when armada of these monsters crawled towards him at a speed of 3-4 km / h. By the way, in peacetime he had to plow the collective farm fields.

[Stas57]

Quote: qwert

It was with such tractors that the "great and brilliant" Tukhachevsky planned to equip the Red Army. He offered to build 9 armored tractors for every normal tank, and to destroy normal tanks. Probably hoped that in case of war the enemy would die of laughter when armada of these monsters crawled towards him at a speed of 3-4 km / h. By the way, in peacetime he had to plow the collective farm fields.

I think you did not understand the issue, if at all you read the article, but you were not too lazy to kick.

This is an ersatz replacement of towed artifacts of the second line, an attempt to frankly save the poor country.
there weren’t enough normal tanks, but the creation was on a goose. the course of heavy artillery support systems was already clearly understood.

on
Of course, it’s good to be rich and happy, and on the warm couch to have a lasting feeling, but to be poor, and still do it for the first time is difficult.
read this again (though rather read this first)
Nowadays, it may seem strange to many, if not ridiculous, the enthusiasm of the leadership of the Red Army for self-propelled guns built on the chassis of conventional tractors. However, one should take into account the fact that at that time not a single army in the world had experience in creating such weapon systems. For this reason, the Soviet military and designers were forced to go by trial and error. In addition, the experience of using self-propelled guns on the chassis of tractors in 1920-s, including trophy white-guard self-propelled guns based on British and American tractors, was positive. These limitedly used combat vehicles showed a fairly high efficiency with relatively low labor costs for production.

In addition, the use of tractor chassis, which were several times cheaper than tank, promised for SAU great benefits. First, such a chassis made it possible to provide the Red Army quickly equipped with self-propelled artillery. Secondly, in the case of a big war, it was possible to dramatically increase the number of combat vehicles by simply reworking the existing tractors in the country's economy into self-propelled artillery installations. In those years, this idea seemed very attractive, especially if we take into account the poor equipment of the Red Army with armored vehicles and the existing difficulties with setting up the production of tanks in Soviet factories.

[GRAY]

Quote: qwert

the enemy will die of laughter when armadas of these freaks crawl at him at a speed of 3-4 km / h.

They had to support the advancing units with fire, and not go on the attack.

[31rus]

Dear, one of the deadlock attempts to create cheaply and cheerfully, although if taken globally, these are the distant ancestors of modern self-propelled guns, it’s interesting that the real samples remain

[samoletil18]

Quote: 31rus

Dear, one of the deadlock attempts to create cheaply and cheerfully, although if taken globally, these are the distant ancestors of modern self-propelled guns, it’s interesting that the real samples remain

Well, then there was no Toyota with recoilless.

[AlNikolaich]

So dear comrades! It is clearly said that this is a second-tier self-propelled gun ... That is, some ersatz like this ... Given that the twenties and thirties were in search of a concept for using tanks, and everything was tried, from machine gun wedges of the Carden-Lloyd type. and ending with monsters like T-35, Ratte, etc. Trial and error method.
But many modern shushpantser build handicraft, just on a similar principle, as these self-propelled guns ...

[Stas57]

SPG SU-2 and SU-5 were recommended for adoption, it was even planned to begin construction of experimental series of vehicles. But the appearance in the USSR of the T-26 tank, which was recognized as much more promising in terms of creating self-propelled guns on its basis,

as a result, nothing was actually put into the army on the T26 either.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Stas57

as a result, nothing was actually put into the army on the T26 either.

EMNIP, there the problem was that the SU-5-1 fell away almost immediately - the army had artillery tanks with 76-mm guns. In the SU-5-3, even the reinforced chassis could not withstand the load during the march and shooting.
It seemed that it would suit the military SU-5-2. But according to the results of her military tests, it turned out that even for the 122nd howitzer, the upgraded T-26 chassis is still too weak, and the engine has low power.

In addition, the SPG itself does not solve anything. In order to take full advantage of the benefits of mechanized artillery, it is necessary to mechanize and equip all divisions of the division with reliable communications. Otherwise, it turns out that the self-propelled guns arrived at positions - and they can’t shoot: until topographic location passes, while signalmen spread out the communication network, until the phones reach the spotters (there were problems with the walkie-talkies - only the types of radio stations provided the quality and range of communications suitable for normal fire adjustment) level from divisional and higher) ... in short, the deployment time of a mechatronic battery will be comparable to the deployment time of a towed battery.

[Stas57]

yes, it’s good to be rich and happy.
absolutely nothing to add (although you can go deeper in particular - for example, artillery reconnaissance and adjustment from directly rifle companies, like the enemy’s, and how communications and staffs are broken in this case, trying to process how to establish this interaction, so that the application is processed in less than half an hour), we were able to partially solve all these problems only to 40 ser and huge efforts.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Stas57

although you can go deeper in particular - for example, artillery reconnaissance and adjustment from directly rifle companies, like the enemy’s, and how communications and staffs are broken in this case, trying to process how to establish this interaction, so that the application is processed in less than half an hour

When still was alive uv. M. Svirin, he at the sudden-strike forum did a good job of describing the problems of Soviet self-propelled artillery for working with closed warheads — for the 30's — the 40's of the last century. As well as approximate dimensions of equipment for creating the Soviet machine of advanced artillery observers and spotters. It turned out that under all this wealth, the T-34, or even KV, chassis was needed.

[Stas57]

Quote: Alexey RA

When still was alive uv. M. Svirin, he at the sudden-strike forum did a good job of describing the problems of Soviet self-propelled artillery for working with closed warheads — for the 30's — the 40's of the last century. As well as approximate dimensions of equipment for creating the Soviet machine of advanced artillery observers and spotters. It turned out that under all this wealth, the T-34, or even KV, chassis was needed.

I remember, and Vifovskie tankosrachi remember, of which there were 2 obvious conclusions - "BT, T-26 will not be able" and "the support and support system will not be able".

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Stas57

the provision and support system will fail. "

... and if it can, then the mechanized corps with such rear areas will not fit anywhere.

We counted on our exercises (we even threw out 2500 vehicles from the combat structure, took the most necessary for life and battle), and then we have 6800 vehicles in the breakthrough, almost 7000.
(...)
After all, you need to stretch the columns of the tank corps, which have a depth of 22 - 23 km.
(...)
One ammunition tank tank is about 100 wagons. Marshal of the Soviet Union, Comrade Budyonny, spoke of the correspondence of ammunition and fuel that must be had in a breakthrough. One ammunition approximately, as I said, is 100 wagons. Imagine what kind of rear is needed to pull it all along, especially if you have three and a half ammunition.

(c) Khatskilevich.

[Stas57]

it's like that
An alarm on the connection showed when you move to 30 - 40 km from the location of the unit, then you need to go back five days and pick up the necessary, but not taken, and take the taken, but unnecessary.
It is necessary to calculate in advance that the car should be driven. When checking the machines that came out, it turned out that all the cars, as a rule, were not loaded on 300 - 500 kg, but there were such machines that could contain 3 tons, and one ton was loaded on them. As a result, the commanders say that there are not enough cars. It is necessary in advance, even in peacetime, to calculate what to load for each car, how much to load, and then our rear will be much smaller and there will be many unnecessary cars instead of shortages.
I must say that our home front is poor, this question remains unfinished.
(c) Fedorenko Y. N.

[mishastich]

But purely outwardly, Kommunar is very beautiful.

[GRAY]

Trash. The tractor cannot accompany the tanks - it is too slow.

[gla172]

Actually, he shot back and changed his position, nothing more is required of him .....

[gla172]

_____________________----))

[GRAY]

Quote: gla172

_____________________----))

This is not from a good life ... And in terms of maneuverability with them was a complete _op.

[GRAY]

Quote: GRAY

in terms of maneuverability with them was a complete _op.

Dada, it was. It was not in vain that the rocket launchers on the truck chassis were made, not tractors or tanks, there was an urgent need to dump the vigorous pace after a volley.
At the end of the war, they were all installed on the Studebaker chassis.

[GRAY]

Quote: gla172

Actually, he shot back and changed his position, nothing more is required of him .....

How is this not required?
How should these SPGs be escorted by tanks? Moreover, in the Red Army, emphasis was placed on high-speed cars, and here the slow-moving tractor ...
During the Great Patriotic War, all the same, they came to the conclusion that self-propelled guns must be on the same level as tanks in terms of mobility.

[Stas57]

Quote: GRAY

How is this not required?
How should these SPGs be escorted by tanks? Moreover, in the Red Army, emphasis was placed on high-speed cars, and here the slow-moving tractor ...

I understand that you did not read the same article?

It is interesting that, along with self-propelled guns, direct support and support of mechanized units (most often these self-propelled guns were designed on the chassis of tanks), the RVS resolution provided for the development in the country “Second-tier self-propelled guns”. 3The results of these self-propelled artillery mounts were determined as follows: "The purpose is to escort and support the attack of tanks of the second echelon of infantry escort." The Kommunar and Stalinets tractors mastered by the industry were to be used as a chassis. The mass of self-propelled guns should not exceed 9-10 tons, the maximum speed - 12-15 km / h. To arm these self-propelled guns of the second echelon was planned 76,2-mm regimental gun or 76-mm anti-aircraft gun. The horizontal aiming angle was to be at least 300 degrees, vertical - 30 degrees

[GRAY]

Quote: Stas57

I understand that you did not read the same article?

I read the article.
Imagine that your tanks have a speed of 30 km / h along the highway, and 14 km / h are given to reinforce the SPG, and you need to overcome 100 km as part of the convoy.
Do not you think that the column will move at the speed of the slowest participant?
And if you need to make some maneuver on the shura? Then you can generally forget about reinforcement, because these SPGs will not keep up with the tanks. What kind of "attack support" can there be?

[Stas57]

Quote: GRAY

Imagine that your tanks have a speed of 30 km / h along the highway, and 14 km / h are given to reinforce the SPG, and you need to overcome 100 km as part of the convoy.
Do not you think that the column will move at the speed of the slowest participant?

once again, for the third time, although it has already been written 2 times, these are not breakthrough tanks, these are self-propelled guns of the 2 line: clearing trenches, destroying bunkers, these are NPP cars, and they will move as the marching infantry goes - 5km / h, as the barrel artillery on horses - 5 km / h
is it clear?

And if you need to make some maneuver on the shura? Then you can generally forget about reinforcement, because these SPGs will not keep up with the tanks. What kind of "attack support" can there be?

for the fourth time, it’s self-propelled artillery self-propelled guns, they move with infantry and horse artillery on horse drawn traction

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Stas57

once again, the third, although it has already been written 2 times, these are not breakthrough tanks, this is the 2nd line self-propelled guns: trenching, destruction of bunkers, these are RPE vehicles, and they will move like marching infantry - 5km / h, as it goes barrel art on horseback - 5 km / h

The question is - in which of the structures was it planned to stick this art.,

The tasks of these self-propelled artillery installations were defined as follows: "Purpose - tracking and supporting the attack tanks of the second echelon of infantry escort».

If in rifle divisions to support their tanks the NPP is one thing (although the zampotech and zampotyt would hang themselves - they couldn’t contain the tanks properly in the SD).
But the trouble is that NPPs in the USSR were also engaged in tank brigades. But for them, the speed of the march is very important - because these brigades were a means of strengthening the army-front level and could be transferred from one section to another.

[Stas57]

Alexei, well, then about the ideas of the very beginning of the 30x, the first mechanized brigades, only the large tank program 31-33 was adopted

By the way, if you remember the SH&U calculations in the "Order" emnip, real speeds were extremely low, not only because of some tanks or some tractors, but because of the general diversity of the park of MK, TBR and TD, so even with a TBR a conditional light SPG on the base of the rest of the tank fleet, the Cominterns, the Stalinists, the Komsomol members still slowed down.
but it is much later

[GRAY]

Quote: Stas57

is it clear?

Is it clear now.
Anyway, trash. Infantry can be put on trucks and artillery can also be towed, but it couldn’t work out with a tractor - there were no transporters then.
There were self-propelled guns on the truck chassis - so they went into production. And they managed to fight the dates with the Japanese.

[Stas57]

Anyway, trash. You can put infantry on trucks

yes no one says that ice) - the motto of the pre-war army - "it's good to be rich and happy." and the first is definitely not about us.

it’s possible, only they are not at all, it was planned to be taken from the narkhoz, but it didn’t quite work out.

but it didn’t work out with a tractor - there were no conveyors then.

Voroshilovets - heavy artillery tractor. Development started in 1935 year. Capacity
3 + 16 people, Speed ​​- 42 km / h without a trailer on the highway, 20 km / h with a trailer on the highway, 16 km / h with a trailer on rough terrain.
STZ-5-NATI from 1937 g. Max. highway speed, km / h 21,5 (up to 22), Number of seats in the cabin 2, Number of seats in the back of 8


But only this did not solve the problem, I recall the famous
«We have in the artillery of the STZ-5 tractor, which delay movement. Our artillery, armed with these tractors, has little mobility and lags behind wheeled vehicles and tank units. (From the Presidium: 30 km per hour). M.G. Khatskilevich: theoretically it is, but practically he does not give such speed.
I note to the trucks that the CV joint did not go with us.

There were self-propelled guns on the truck chassis - so they went into production. And they managed to fight the dates with the Japanese.

and then everything ended, eventually switched to open self-propelled guns (SU76) or closed (Su, ISU) based on completely different machines

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Stas57

and then everything ended, eventually switched to open self-propelled guns (SU76) or closed (Su, ISU) based on completely different machines

As a result, the USSR generally temporarily abandoned the support class of self-propelled guns (for indirect fire and with PDO) and switched to assault self-propelled guns, for which the direct fire was the main fire (and which, as a result, were given to the tank crew from the gunners).
For there were no other options in the war: assault self-propelled guns did not require personnel of "double training" (tankers-artillerymen), did not require mechanized observers, accurate and fast topographic reference and clear reliable communication, and had a significantly lower consumption of shells to suppress their typical targets (and this sharply cuts rears).
As for artillery ... the Red Army considered that infantry artillery would help tanks break through the enemy’s defense (to a depth of 7-8 km from the front line). And when operating in the depths of the enemy’s defense, the assault of self-propelled guns is enough to storm its weak resistance nodes. Strong nodes (for the assault of which will require full-fledged artillery bombardment with the suppression of anti-tank missiles and enemy artillery batteries) should be bypassed by the military.

[hohol95]

Why the projects on self-propelled guns were abandoned in the USSR is well described in this book - M. Svirin "STALIN's self-propelled guns, history of Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-1945".

[hohol95]

In the photo you submitted SU-1-12! Accepted from the Leningrad Kirov plant were 99 pieces. They were made from 1934 to 1935! And if you are interested in the tesa of Soviet self-propelled artillery, find the book by M. Svirin "Stalin's self-propelled guns, the history of Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-1945".

[hohol95]

In the photo you submitted SU-1-12! Accepted from the Leningrad Kirov plant were 99 pieces. They were made from 1934 to 1935! And if you are interested in the tesa of Soviet self-propelled artillery, find the book by M. Svirin "Stalin's self-propelled guns, the history of Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-1945".

[vomag]

Tests of self-propelled guns SU-2 were carried out from October 12 to October 16, 1931 I think that in those days, it was like an "idea" very innovative .......... and not on the topic at my flag, then mattresses, then geyrops ... sadness what to do how to remove it?

[hohol95]

And if you are interested in the tesa of Soviet self-propelled artillery, find the book by M. Svirin "Stalin's self-propelled guns, the history of Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-1945".

[serezhasoldatow]

The prototype of the modern "Terminator". For a long time it was embodied in metal.

[GRAY]

Quote: serezhasoldatow

The prototype of the modern "Terminator". For a long time it was embodied in metal.

Aa ha ha

[Alexey RA]

Today, many may find it strange, if not ridiculous, the enthusiasm of the leadership of the Red Army for self-propelled guns built on the chassis of conventional tractors. However, one should take into account the fact that at that time not a single army in the world had the experience of creating such weapons systems.

Actually, the British had. At first, back in WWI, the Gun Carrier Mark I self-propelled gun was created from the tank by alteration. And in the mid-20s, the full-fledged Birch Gun self-propelled guns appeared, which was only part of an ambitious project to create British mechanized forces. Unfortunately for the army, limes, political squabbles and the financial crisis put an end to the military forces of the late 20s.

The Entente was ill with "guns on tractors" back in WWI.

[qwert]

Quote: Stas57

I think you did not understand the issue, if at all you read the article, but you were not too lazy to kick.
This is an ersatz replacement of towed artifacts of the second line, an attempt to frankly save the poor country.
there weren’t enough normal tanks, but the creation was on a goose. the course of heavy artillery support systems was already clearly understood.

And I really argue. I just saw with my own eyes the samples of tractors that Tukhachevsky was talking about, and with which he wanted to dilute "just tanks" in a large proportion. And that time was like that and they were looking for concepts of application, etc. I do not touch it. It was possible at that time and it was true, especially as self-propelled guns, but the deputy people's commissar wanted to move them into the first line. And this was definitely not the right decision. But the conversation about this, I agree, is beyond the scope of the article.

[opus]

Quote: qwert

I just saw with my own eyes the samples of tractors that Tukhachevsky was talking about, and with which he wanted to dilute "just tanks" in a large proportion.

Well that's not true

Tukhachevsky believed that, unlike World War I, aviation and tanks ceased to be an auxiliary means of conducting infantry and artillery combat and saw “The ability, through the mass introduction of tanks, to change the methods of warfare and operations, ... the ability to create for the enemy sudden conditions for the development of the operation through these innovations.”, proposed "a completely new approach to the planning of the entire weapons system, organizations, tactics and training of troops. Failure to take these possibilities into account can cause even greater upheavals and defeats in a future war. ”

Ten years before the outbreak of World War IIwhen neither Germany nor Japan had not a single tankTukhachevsky proposed building in one year 2-4 times more tanks than Germany built for all the years of World War II, and 13-26 times more than Japan built for all years of the war.

Of course, you can’t build a T-34 in the 30s in the number of 33000, but there are 40 such pepelats, you can

[Alexey RA]

Quote: opus

Well that's not true

In general, it’s true. To maximize the production of tanks, Tukhachevsky really proposed building them on the basis of serial tractors. And finally kill the country's economy by releasing only those tractor models that can become the basis for tanks.

Before summarizing what has been said about the types of tanks listed above, it is necessary to emphasize a number of general conditions for the design and production of tanks. These conditions are as follows.
Other things being equal, a wheeled-tracked tank has advantages over a tracked one.
Similarly, amphibians have advantages over a non-floating tank.
The dimensions of the tanks should be commensurate with the dimensions of the fuselages of heavy bombers.
The fuel reserve should be enough for 150-200 kilometers.
The bulk of the tanks should be built on the basis of a standardized fleet of vehicles in the country. And vice versa, new types of cars and tractors should be put into production only if they can become the mechanical basis of the tank.

By 1919, the Entente was preparing 10 tanks, and this is almost on the threshold of the birth of the tank. Representation of the future role of tanks on a scale of 000 gives rise to the desire to combine in one tank all the qualities that you can imagine. Thus, the tank becomes complex, expensive and inapplicable in the economy of the country. And vice versa, neither a tractor nor a car can be directly used as the basis of such a tank.
The situation is completely different if you build a tank on the basis of a tractor and a car, produced in the masses by industry. In this case, the number of tanks will grow tremendously ...
... "Krasny Putilovets" from March 1931 will produce a new type of tractor, one and a half times stronger. The current model is too weak. The new tractor will give a great light tank. The model of the Stalingrad plant and Caterpillar are also adapted for a tank.
In general, the issue of using a tractor and a car for a tank should be considered resolved in our conditions.

The point in this question was set only in 1942, when the specialists from Kubinka bitterly stated:

Unfortunately, such a significant role of the transmission in ensuring the combat qualities of the vehicle has not yet been adequately appreciated by the domestic tank industry. Even a cursory acquaintance with the transmissions of domestic and foreign vehicles shows that if, in terms of engine quality, armor, weapons, domestic vehicles are superior to all foreign-made cars that we know, then the transmission of domestic tanks is inferior to the transmissions of foreign tanks, behind the modern development of tank building technology.

This situation has contributed a lot. our widespread view of tank transmission as a tractor-type transmission and underestimation of the role that it plays in determining the tactical, technical and combat characteristics of the tank.

[kumaxa]

yeah and leave agriculture without draft power. Sales people in the early 30s in the State Planning Committee were literate people who could explain and show everything to the head of the government on paper and on fingers. therefore, the BT-7 tanks of a breakthrough tank and the T-26 infantry support tank were adopted. from the book of A. SHIROKORAD and PUBLICATIONS from neta including the top versions of the modifications of these tanks were darkness including telemetric tanks. The tank chassis is a chassis designed for short-term special use in war conditions. Under these tasks, it was then designed and is being designed now. Tukhachevsky’s ravings cost him a post and then life.

[505506]

Kamenty, at times, deliver, no less than the main article. It’s a pity, it’s not always immediately clear where the special comments are and where the sofa is.

[hohol95]

If you are interested in the topic of Soviet self-propelled artillery, find the book by M. Svirin "Stalin's self-propelled guns, the history of Soviet self-propelled guns 1919-1945".

[Andrey77]

The author of the article:

"In accordance with the military-theoretical thought of that time, it was believed that the shock and firepower of mechanized formations should be provided not only by tanks, but also by self-propelled guns - self-propelled artillery installations."

Rave. There were no self-propelled guns in the Red Army. They appeared later, when the Germans proved that such a system has the right to life. Prototypes do not count.